6 replies to this topic

[Christof Z]

I find it interesting to compare the efforts of different pen makers, during same periods, making the process of pen filling cleaner.

That's why I had a look to my collection for "clean" pen filling systems during the same period. Here is what I found:
 
In 1952 Sheaffer's brought the Snorkel filler to the market. Due this complicated mechanism, it was possible to fill the pen without dipping the nib in ink. No wiping was necessary.
 

 
Then, one year later in 1953 Waterman's c/f Cartridge filler came to the market. As we know today, a quite successful concept:
 

 
Late to the party, in 1956, Parker came with the 61 capillary filler. And with this filling system came the instant ink cartridge. Unfortunately, I don't know when exactly the instant ink has been invented.
 

 
These were meant to be used on the road, when no bottle of liquid ink was available. Just plug a cartrige of dried ink on the capillary filler and hold it in fresh water. The water will be sucked by force of capillary and flows through the cartridge, dissolving the dry ink pellet. Geniously!
 
[/url]
 
All of them are very elegant filling systems, but the Parker 61 capillary filler is my favourite!
 
which one is yours, and do you know of other genious systems?
 
C.

[ihimlen]

I liked the short-lived Eversharp Kleen Fill ink bottle (I'll add some more info later this evening when I'm back from work). And let's not forget the vaunted Sheaffer Snorkel

[Daniel A]

Conklin made frequent mention of this (see fine print in ads):

 

 

http://www.ebay.com/...=item3cfd541890

 

http://www.ebay.com/...=p2047675.l2557

 

 

http://www.ebay.com/...=p2047675.l2557

[BrianMcQueen]

I think those Conklin ads mean "cleans the ink out of the pen by itself" when they say "self-cleaning."

[Daniel A]

The early ads, like this one, often contrasted the ease and "cleanliness" of filling a Conklin with that of competitors' eyedropper fillers. Notice the inset with the Conklin nib in the inkwell and the inset with ink splashing from the eyedropper.

 

 

http://www.ebay.com/...sd=261954223742

[welch]

I liked, and still admire, the Parker cartridge / converter introduced about 1960 with the Parker 45. It was simple and allowed me to fill each morning from a bottle (Sheaffer'S Washable Black #62), and to carry a cartridge or two of Quink just in case my pen ran dry.

 

You can find a YouTube TV commercial for Sheaffer'S PFM, one that includes about 15 seconds explaining why the snorkel filling system is great: it is cleaner. I was a school kid in 1960...we never saw anyone using a Snorkel or PFM. They were top-line pens, like the Parker 51 and P-61. Many of us used Sheaffer "school pens", the translucent cartridge pens. Snorkel filling always reminded me of a mosquito bite...not appealing. Incidentally, I have an older Skrip box that advertises the Snorkel: "Takes the dunk out of filling".

 

Other kids might have used Esterbrooks -- squeeze filler or maybe cartridge. Some must have used Wearevers. 

 

In general, parents (in those days, that usually meant mothers) disliked lever-fillers and bottled ink, and were curious about ballpoints. They had grown up during the Depression, when they had used "third-tier" fountain pens or stick pens in school. They all had horror stories of "the time my friend's pen exploded ink all over", or the time my broker tipped over an ink bottle. Rough price, 1960, USD: Parker 51 / 61 and Sheaffer PFM: $12 - $15. Parker 45: $4.98. Parker Jotter: $1.98. The BiC "Crystal" showed up about then: maybe 10 cents? That was the business problem Parker faced. (Amazing that Parker and Sheaffer survived in any form!)

[Paul S.]

very interesting thread, thanks.                 Vaguely related to this thread, although not so sure the end result was that clean, was another design effort of  'adding water to dried ink'  -  and this was the British company De La Rue's offering via their Onoto Pelletink pen.            Designed c. 1940 - and described as a pen for 'active service', this has a capacity for six pellets, and by adding water you were off and away and able to write home, although in the not-always-hospitable-conditions of wartime, it may well have been paper that was more the stumbling block.

The pen was quoted as having enough ink capacity to last for a year or more - quite possible in the often prolonged difficult conditions that war time  service people found themselves.

A long rear blind cap section held the pellets, with water contained in the fore part of the barrel - mine has a 14 ct. nib, and the pen is black  -  don't know if other colours were produced  -  possibly not.